Is not short for a female name. He raised her as a tomboy. One of her early pictures is with her father fishing at a stream. We have a picture of her carrying a rifle on top of it a burro. She had great joy in being outdoors. Susan how does that translate into her grownup years . Annette she stayed fascinated with the outdoors her entire life. Her decision to study geology at Stanford University is an outgrowth of that. Even as late as her night as her 60s, we have material of her going on a camping trip at the age of 63. She slept on the ground and rode into camp on horseback. Her other camp mates slept in tents. Susan from a Public Policy perspective, she also spent much of her years encouraging other young women to incorporate the outdoors and physical activity into their lives. , she wantedust her those benefits for other women. Annette there started to be some interest in women being more physically active. She took it to the next set. There were two areas where she got involved.
Encourage charity. Their one term ended with great public frustration. Tonight, the story of lou hoover. What an interesting life she had. Here to tell us about her years before the white house is annette dunlap. She is a scholar at the Hoover Institution and working on a biography of Lou Henry Hoover. What inspired you to spend several years of your life looking at this woman . I was at the National First Ladies Library in canton, ohio. I realized that this was a story that has not been told. There are so many layers to her. Some activities that she was involved in. The legacy that she left for women is something that i want people to know about. She was born in waterloo, iowa. The story i heard is that her father wanted a boy. So they say. The name lou is not short for anything. She was raised as a tomboy. One of the earliest pictures of her is her fishing in a stream. We have a picture of her carrying a rifle. A lot of her diary talks about her joy of being able to hunt, fish, and b
It does not look bleak to me at all because what all of this the dominantthat strategy that we have used for a decade is not the strategy that is going to kick the door open to help all children succeed. It is just like the strategies that we used in the 70s and 1980s. You see incremental grains. Gains. In the 1960s you see bigger games and you did in the 1970s, 1980s and, 1990s. With the war on poverty we focused on equity. Im giving kids that have the least creating a more level playing field. The you saw in the terms of 1970s, 19 80s, 1990s, and now, is that we actually didnt do . We did some programs that help some kids, but not all kids. In the last 10 years with no child kind is that we said that testing and sanctions are going to be the dominant strategy. The countries that outcompete us do not use that. What they do instead is that they actually focus on ensuring that kids get really good teachers and really good teaching and have a real focus on equity as well. I am optimistic